User talk:Wiki-tom76

Welcome!

Hi Wiki-tom76! I noticed your contributions and wanted to welcome you to the Wikipedia community. I hope you like it here and decide to stay.

As you get started, you may find this short tutorial helpful:

Learn more about editing

Alternatively, the contributing to Wikipedia page covers the same topics.

If you have any questions, we have a friendly space where experienced editors can help you here:

Get help at the Teahouse

If you are not sure where to help out, you can find a task here:

Volunteer at the Task Center

Happy editing! Synorem (talk) 12:14, 6 March 2024 (UTC)

Hi Synorem! Thanks a bunch. I am doing bilingual editing. English and Hungarian. I hope my contribution will be beneficial. Wiki-tom76 (talk) 12:19, 6 March 2024 (UTC)

It sure is. It is a combined effort of small efforts like yours that help make Wikipedia what it is today - so again, thank you for your efforts! Synorem (talk) 14:38, 6 March 2024 (UTC)

Hi, is there a way to delete/archive all these draft related traffic below this post? Also, I have deleted most of these drafts before the 6 months expiration time and I am still getting bugged for not finishing it. No idea how this works honestly. A bit of explanation would help. Thanks. Wiki-tom76 (talk) 22:28, 11 October 2024 (UTC)

Hi again Tom, happy to help - If you click here to edit this page, you can simply remove the other user's notifications, as it is your page. You'll usually only get asked once or twice until they remove it and stop asking you. Synorem (talk) 14:34, 25 October 2024 (UTC)

Wikipedia and copyright

Hello Wiki-tom76! Your additions to William Dean Chocolates have been removed in whole or in part, as they appear to have added copyrighted content without evidence that the source material is in the public domain or has been released by its owner or legal agent under a suitably free and compatible copyright license. (To request such a release, see Wikipedia:Requesting copyright permission.) While we appreciate your contributions to Wikipedia, it's important to understand and adhere to guidelines about using information from sources to prevent copyright and plagiarism issues. Here are the key points:

• Limited quotation: You may only copy or translate a small portion of a source. Any direct quotations must be enclosed in double quotation marks (") and properly cited using an inline citation. More information is available on the non-free content page. To learn how to cite a source, see Help:Referencing for beginners.
• Paraphrasing: Beyond limited quotations, you are required to put all information in your own words. Following the source's wording too closely can lead to copyright issues and is not permitted; see Wikipedia:Close paraphrasing. Even when paraphrasing, you must still cite your sources as appropriate.
• Image use guidelines: In most scenarios, only freely licensed or public domain images may be used and these should be uploaded to our sister project, Wikimedia Commons. In some scenarios, non-freely copyrighted content can be used if they meet all ten of our non-free content criteria; Wikipedia:Plain and simple non-free content guide may help with determining a file's eligibility.
• Copyrighted material donation: If you hold the copyright to the content you want to copy, or are a legally designated agent, you may be able to license the text for publication here. Please see Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials.
• Copying and translation within Wikipedia: Wikipedia articles can be copied or translated, however they must have proper attribution in accordance with Wikipedia:Copying within Wikipedia. For translation, see Help:Translation § License requirements.

It's very important that contributors understand and follow these practices. Persistent failure to comply may result in being blocked from editing. If you have any questions or need further clarification, please ask them here on this page, or leave a message on my talk page. Thank you. GreenLipstickLesbian (talk) 06:35, 12 December 2024 (UTC)

Hi,

Well, it's quite funny. I have done this because I personally know the owner, Bill. We spoke about to add more information to the article and he also will provide me more insights which nowhere else available. He made some comments that the article is pretty good but we could still add more information and details.

Anyway, I am not sure what I could do at this point to prove my point, nevertheless I do have the permission from the owner of the website, although only verbally. Is that not enough? If so, what do I need to do to handle this issue? Wiki-tom76 (talk) 12:18, 12 December 2024 (UTC)

This creates a new problem: since you have a relationship with the owner of the subject of the article, you have a conflict of interest, and that means you need to be extra careful about how you edit the article. Ideally, you don't edit the article directly at all; instead, you request edits at the article's talk page. You also need to provide reliable sources, and preferably independent secondary sources, to back up each change.

As for copyright, since you are not the copyright holder, you do not have the authority to donate the contents of the website or relicense it into the public domain. Even if the owner made a proper donation or relicensing, the text would likely need to be rewritten, because the tone of the material at the subject's website would be too promotional to use here. —C.Fred (talk) 12:25, 12 December 2024 (UTC)

I love problems and I like to solve them. I guess I will just follow the path and re-write the whole thing from a neutral viewpoint. Honestly I had no idea about this COI issue, but I am learning the ropes. What about if the owner sends me an e-mail and I use the content of the e-mail for the article. There is no copyright or such a thing in this case, correct? Wiki-tom76 (talk) 01:39, 13 December 2024 (UTC)

The issues there will be with sourcing: is the owner citing independent sources in the email? Plus there will still be the tone issue. As far as the copyright issue, it could be interpreted that the email is a release of the material, but there would be bigger issues with conflict of interest, promotional tone, and non-neutral point of view. —C.Fred (talk) 03:52, 13 December 2024 (UTC)

Excuse me for weighing in but C.Fred is exactly right. I'll add, although the point is now moot, that the contents of emails are subject to full copyright unless they are explicitly licensed otherwise. However, there is no particular reason to identify how to get it appropriately licensed as the other items (COI, non-neutral, etc.) are present.

It is quite understandable that someone might think that getting information from the source should be the gold standard but it's not. Please see the Wikipedia:Five pillars which speak generally to the principles of Wikipedia but also specifically to some of these issues. S Philbrick(Talk) 17:39, 24 December 2024 (UTC)

Recent edit reversion

In this edit here, I reverted some information that appears to be a violation of our copyright policy.

I provided a brief summary of the problem in the edit summary, which should be visible just below my name. You can also click on the "view history" tab in the article to see the recent history of the article. This should be an edit with my name, and a parenthetical comment explaining why your edit was reverted. If that information is not sufficient to explain the situation, please ask.

I do occasionally make mistakes. We get hundreds of reports of potential copyright violations every week, and sometimes there are false positives, for a variety of reasons. (Perhaps the material was moved from another Wikipedia article, or the material was properly licensed but the license information was not obvious, or the material is in the public domain but I didn't realize it was public domain, and there can be other situations generating a report to our Copy Patrol tool that turn out not to be actual copyright violations.) If you think my edit was mistaken, please politely let me know and I will investigate. S Philbrick(Talk) 17:34, 24 December 2024 (UTC)